Signals

THE SIGNAL BOX


Railway signalling discussion

Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

British signalling of the past (UK, excepting Northern Ireland)

Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby scarpa » Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:46 pm

In the former relay room of Stratford signalbox there was a linen roll with the signalling layout, which was fixed on two rollers mounted vertically, on which you could find the area you were looking for. All the running signals were multi aspect type out on the track. On the roll they were depicted as searchlight signals.

Looking at a reprint of the signalling notice for the opening of Bow signalbox again the signals on the diagram, with the exception of a couple multi aspect signals, are depicted as searchlight type running signals. Is it possible due to introducing the Central line there was a concern over immunisation and they were changed to multi-aspect (although two searchlight signals fixed on each platform underneath canopies were searchlights and had D.C. mechanisms until they were abolished)?

The multi aspect signals had red as the bottom aspect. G.R.S. supplied for this area unlike Maryland to Gidea Park, where red was the second aspect from the bottom (supplied by Westinghouse) and the signals at Liverpool Street to Bethnal Green (supplied by Siemens) single yellow at the bottom. Or could it have been a Drawing Office quirk to use a searchlight symbol?
scarpa
Branch line box
Branch line box
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:07 pm

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby StevieG » Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:59 pm

Don't know any firm answers scarpa, but I know there was also a linen of the Liv.St. signalling also using all-searchlight symbology whereas the signals were actually MASs as you say.
BZOH

/
\ \ \ //\ \
/// \ \ \ \
StevieG
Double-manned box
Double-manned box
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:30 am
Location: ex-GNR territory in N. Herts.

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby John Hinson » Tue Dec 19, 2017 3:28 am

They were shown the same way on the box diagram at Stratford but I can't speak for Bow Junction as I have yet to see any photographs.

There were places on the Southern Railway that were similar - I think the answer lies in the drawings being provided by the signalling contractors and not by the railway company themselves who each had different drawing office standards. I have certainly seen plans for other boxes along the route which had definitely been produced by the contractor.

I have seen drawings of some locations on LNER territory where a change of policy caused searchlights to replace multi-aspect signals at a late stage of planning (the reverse of the above suggestion) but new drawings were issued for that. This was for the colour-light signalling on the Clacton branch (from memory). I am not aware of any policy change in the other direction though.

John
Image
‹(•¿•)›
User avatar
John Hinson
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 8, 2007 1:13 pm
Location: at my computer

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby Fast Line Floyd » Tue Dec 19, 2017 6:07 pm

Bow Junction was the same as Stratford and I'm sure that Mile End was too although the photos I have seen of that were not too detailed.
Graham
User avatar
Fast Line Floyd
Main line box
Main line box
 
Posts: 1656
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:42 am
Location: Raunds

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby StevieG » Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:43 pm

John Hinson wrote: " They were shown the same way on the box diagram at Stratford but I can't speak for Bow Junction as I have yet to see any photographs. .... "

John "
Can I just ask you to clarify John : By "on the box diagram at Stratford", (and referring to not having seen photographs of Bow), do you mean on the panel(s) in the box(es) (which I would struggle to see as relevant to scarpa's query), or some sort of paper or linen diagram/plan of Stratford ?
Fast Line Floyd wrote: " Bow Junction was the same as Stratford and I'm sure that Mile End was too although the photos I have seen of that were not too detailed. "
Like Bow and Stratford FLF, Mile End panel was of Metrovick./ GRS make.
But scarpa's query is about multi-lens actual signal heads vs. plans of them depicted as searchlights: Or am I misunderstanding your post ?
BZOH

/
\ \ \ //\ \
/// \ \ \ \
StevieG
Double-manned box
Double-manned box
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:30 am
Location: ex-GNR territory in N. Herts.

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby John Hinson » Wed Dec 20, 2017 7:40 am

StevieG wrote:Can I just ask you to clarify John : By "on the box diagram at Stratford", (and referring to not having seen photographs of Bow), do you mean on the panel(s) in the box(es) (which I would struggle to see as relevant to scarpa's query), or some sort of paper or linen diagram/plan of Stratford ?

Sorry, yes, I mean "panel" rather than box "diagram"

The relevance is that for those schemes a drawing office "negative" for the panel would almost certainly have been produced by the contractor, not by the L&NER. I have several panel negatives from that section of line which are marked with the name of the contractor but unfortunately not for Stratford/Bow Junction.

The above are quite separate to a "single-line" S&T plan but the common factor is that they are both produced by the contractor in their own style.

I think Scarpa was maybe making an assumption that because the signals were drawn in "lollipop" style that this indicated searchlight signals - which it would on true L&NER/BR(ER) plans.

I drew a comparison with the SR who similarly always showed signal heads accurately on their own drawings, yet contractors drawings (from Westinghouse) did not.

John
Image
‹(•¿•)›
User avatar
John Hinson
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 8, 2007 1:13 pm
Location: at my computer

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby StevieG » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:44 am

Thanks John. I see your reasoning now : That's a link that I hadn't thought of.

But the linen plan of Liverpool Street which I saw showed all the running signals in full searchlight style, including those of 4-aspect, two lens configuration, using the standard horizontal vertical and diagonal lines indicating aspect colours displayable, whereas we know that the finished articles on the ground were of 2, 3 and 4 multi-lens type, and I had made the assumption that this was the sort of anomaly to which Scarpa referred.
Unfortunately I don't recall how the LS plan might've been marked as to date, or being of contractor or LNE/BR origin.
BZOH

/
\ \ \ //\ \
/// \ \ \ \
StevieG
Double-manned box
Double-manned box
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:30 am
Location: ex-GNR territory in N. Herts.

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby John Hinson » Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:17 am

Yes, but is this an anomoly or is it just a different style of drawing?

John
Image
‹(•¿•)›
User avatar
John Hinson
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 8, 2007 1:13 pm
Location: at my computer

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby kbarber » Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:29 am

Unless I'm much mistaken, the panel at Stratford didn't have any signal symbols for controlled signals; the entrance switch, in effect, was the symbol with the red/green indication showing through the centre of the switch. Auto signals approaching the controlled area were shown; I'm not sure how they appeared on Stratford panel (IIRC those at Barking, a much later MV-GRS installation, were shown correctly as 4-aspect searchlights).
User avatar
kbarber
Rest-day relief
Rest-day relief
 
Posts: 553
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:12 pm
Location: London

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby Fast Line Floyd » Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:27 am

Keith,

Brain now engaged, you are absolutely right as far as the Stratford mainline panels were concerned and Bow Junction and Mile End were the same.
Graham
User avatar
Fast Line Floyd
Main line box
Main line box
 
Posts: 1656
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:42 am
Location: Raunds

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby John Hinson » Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:39 am

Ah, that would explain why I could see so few signals in the not-very-good photograph I was looking at!

Those I can see are definitely drawn as lollipops, I can assure you.

John
Image
‹(•¿•)›
User avatar
John Hinson
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6882
Joined: Thu Nov 8, 2007 1:13 pm
Location: at my computer

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby Fast Line Floyd » Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:08 am

The ones that I can see as lollipops are the banner repeaters/co-actor signals and signals that are not controlled such as autos but no others. See the photo that I am sending you by email which you may want to post.
Graham
User avatar
Fast Line Floyd
Main line box
Main line box
 
Posts: 1656
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:42 am
Location: Raunds

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby StevieG » Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:36 am

'Lollipops' on panels never in doubt, and might be helpful in some ways in this context (you needn't bother looking for any separate symbol for controlled signals on these panels though).
But 'beg pardon sirs', but I think that the OP only refers to a linen roll layout plan, signal symbology in a signalling notice, and signal heads out on the track; not what's on panels.
BZOH

/
\ \ \ //\ \
/// \ \ \ \
StevieG
Double-manned box
Double-manned box
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:30 am
Location: ex-GNR territory in N. Herts.

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby scarpa » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:31 pm

On the Stratford reprint copy of signalling alterations traffic publication it also shows the up main and up electric auto signals from Forest Gate on the Stratford signalling plan as drawn as searchlights when we know they were multi aspect. I think the complexity of the layouts on plans meant drawing a signal as a searchlight took up less space on the diagrams. Would it be allowed now to draw signals as searchlights on plans? THe multi aspect type head is a dying signal being replaced with L.E.D. type signals reminsent of the original searchlight signals.
scarpa
Branch line box
Branch line box
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:07 pm

Re: Stratford and Bow Junction 1945 resignalling

Unread postby StevieG » Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:46 pm

Wasn't there some sort of change to a signalling technical standard a few years ago about how running signals should be shown on signalling plans FLF (E/S/11070?) ?
I vaguely recall querying, during around 2012 -2015, why the scheme plans of one resignalling project (I forget which) were using what we would have thought to be symbology of 2, 3 & 4-lens signal heads to represent 1 and 2-aperture LED heads as well as conventional muti-lens heads, and was told that the plan symbols were now to be shown like that to clearly represent, in a standard way, signals' displayable aspects and not the physical 'appearance' of signal heads.
BZOH

/
\ \ \ //\ \
/// \ \ \ \
StevieG
Double-manned box
Double-manned box
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:30 am
Location: ex-GNR territory in N. Herts.

Next

Return to Signalling - historical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests